Resource sustainability and challenges in the supply chain: implications for infection prevention.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Infection prevention and control practices remain the bedrock of healthcare associated infection prevention and outbreak and epidemic control efforts. However, issues in supply chain management can hinder these efforts, as exemplified by various public health emergencies. This review explores the key role of supply chains in infection prevention and explores specific challenges. RECENT FINDINGS: In all of the critical components of infection prevention and control - hand hygiene, personal protective equipment, sterile supplies, environmental disinfection, and waste management - disruptions in supply chains have led to limited availability and dissemination. SUMMARY: Strategies to mitigate these resource constraints in the inter-epidemic period will also be highlighted. The infection prevention workforce is well poised to inform supply chain dynamics. Without robust and adequate supply chains, infection prevention and control efforts suffer which perpetuates healthcare-associated infections, clusters, and epidemics.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infections Among Emergency Health Care Personnel: Impact on Delivery of United States Emergency Medical Care, 2020.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: In the early months of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and before vaccine availability, there were concerns that infected emergency department (ED) health care personnel could present a threat to the delivery of emergency medical care. We examined how the pandemic affected staffing levels and whether COVID-19 positive staff were potentially infectious at work in a cohort of US ED health care personnel in 2020. METHODS: The COVID-19 Evaluation of Risks in Emergency Departments (Project COVERED) project was a multicenter prospective cohort study of US ED health care personnel conducted from May to December 2020. During surveillance, health care personnel completed weekly electronic surveys and underwent periodic serology and nasal reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing for SARS-CoV-2, and investigators captured weekly data on health care facility COVID-19 prevalence and health care personnel staffing. Surveys asked about symptoms, potential exposures, work attendance, personal protective equipment use, and behaviors. RESULTS: We enrolled 1,673 health care personnel who completed 29,825 person weeks of surveillance. Eighty-nine (5.3%) health care personnel documented 90 (0.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2% to 0.4%) person weeks of missed work related to documented or concerns for COVID-19 infection. Health care personnel experienced symptoms of COVID-19 during 1,256 (4.2%) person weeks and worked at least one shift whereas symptomatic during 1,042 (83.0%) of these periods. Seventy-five (4.5%) participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the surveillance period, including 43 (57.3%) who indicated they never experienced symptoms; 74 (98.7%; 95% CI 90.7% to 99.9%) infected health care personnel worked at least one shift during the initial period of infection, and 71 (94.7%) continued working until laboratory confirmation of their infection. Physician staffing was not associated with the facility or community COVID-19 levels within any time frame studied (Kendall tau's 0.02, 0.056, and 0.081 for no shift, one-week time shift, and 2-week time shift, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the pandemic, COVID-19 infections in ED health care personnel were infrequent, and the time lost from the workforce was minimal. Health care personnel frequently reported for work while infected with SARS-CoV-2 before laboratory confirmation. The ED staffing levels were poorly correlated with facility and community COVID-19 burden.

Frequency of exposure incidents in hospital workers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic based on the hospital status and the use of personal protective equipment: a descriptive study with a historical comparison group.

BACKGROUND: An occupational exposure, i.e. exposure incident (EI), is contact with potentially contaminated material that may contain bloodborne pathogens and that occurs during occupational activities inside or outside a health care facility, either during direct work with a patient or during contact with a patient's body fluids and tissues. This study aimed to compare the frequency of EIs in a university hospital before and during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: This was a descriptive study with a historical comparison group conducted at the Dubrava University Hospital (DUH) in Zagreb, Croatia. We compared the frequency of EIs among healthcare and non-healthcare workers before (from March 11, 2018, to March 10, 2020) and during (from March 11, 2020, to March 11, 2022) the COVID-19 pandemic, expressed as the number of EIs per number of hospitalized patients and the total number of hospital activities. We analyzed data based on the status of the hospital (a COVID-19 hospital or not) and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) as recommended by the World Health Organization. RESULTS: During the total analyzed period, 241 EIs were reported in DUH. Before the pandemic, 128 EIs were reported, compared to 113 during the pandemic. Before the pandemic, 91% of EIs were recorded in healthcare workers, while during the pandemic, 96% of EIs were recorded in healthcare workers. Slightly more EIs were recorded during the period of mixed work form and de-escalation of PPE. The rate of EIs relative to the total number of hospital patients was significantly higher during the pandemic (3.9/1000) than in the pre-pandemic period (2.5/1000). The rate of EIs relative to the total number of hospital activities was significantly higher during the pandemic (0.4/1000) than in the pre-pandemic period (0.2/1000). CONCLUSION: The rate of EIs relative to the total number of hospitalized patients and the total number of hospital activities in DUH was significantly higher during the pandemic, and the rate of total EIs increased among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study show that it is necessary to constantly and effectively work on the prevention of EI.

Infection prevention and control status at public hospitals and factors associated with COVID-19 infection among healthcare workers in Myanmar: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals should prepare for emerging diseases and protect healthcare workers (HCWs) from work-related infection. This study aims to assess public hospital preparedness for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a year after the Myanmar government began implementing COVID-19 prevention measures, and to identify factors associated with work-related COVID-19 infection among HCWs in Myanmar. METHODS: In January 2021, data were collected from 101 hospitals and 706 HCWs who had COVID-19 in Myanmar in 2020. Data from the hospitals included basic information, the status of infection prevention and control (IPC), the preparedness for COVID-19 (guidelines, checklists, fever screening, patient pathway, and training), handwashing facilities, and availability of personal protective equipment (PPE). Data of COVID-19 infected HCWs included age, occupation, workplace, severity and source of COVID-19 infection, knowledge and practice of handwashing, and working environment. Chi-square test was performed to compare the preparedness for COVID-19 among three hospital levels (primary, secondary and tertiary levels). Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the associated factors of work-related infection of HCWs. RESULTS: The total number of beds, HCWs, and COVID-19 patients in 2020 at the 101 hospitals was 12,888, 14,421, and 19,835, respectively. The availability of PPE was high in hospitals at all levels. Approximately 80% of hospitals had functional status of IPC, set up fever screening and patient pathway, and provided training on IPC and COVID-19. However, only 39.6% of hospitals had developed COVID-19 guidelines and 55.4% had developed checklists. The percentage of hospitals that prepared each measurement was lowest at the primary level. The factors associated with work-related COVID-19 among HCWs were being 30-39 years old, working as a doctor, working at isolation wards, having disinfection technique training, and having enough PPE at the workplace. CONCLUSION: The preparedness for COVID-19 at public hospitals in Myanmar in January 2021 was insufficient, especially in the availability of the guidelines and checklists and at primary hospitals. A support system for hospital pandemic preparedness and monitoring of IPC implementation is needed. The government should prepare for emerging diseases and provide appropriate and adequate PPE and additional training to all HCWs, especially HCWs who work for isolation wards.

Paramedics' experiences of barriers to, and enablers of, responding to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Paramedics' work, even pre-pandemic, can be confronting and dangerous. As pandemics add extra stressors, the study explored paramedics' lived experience of the barriers to, and enablers of, responding to suspected or confirmed Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. METHODS: This exploratory-descriptive qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to investigate Queensland metropolitan paramedics' experiences of responding to cases during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Registered Paramedics were recruited by criterion sampling of staff who experienced the COVID-19 pandemic as active officers. RESULTS: Nine registered paramedics participated. Five themes emerged: communication, fear and risk, work-related protective factors, leadership, and change. Unique barriers included impacts on effective communication due to the mobile nature of paramedicine, inconsistent policies/procedures between different healthcare facilities, dispatch of incorrect information to paramedics, assisting people to navigate the changing healthcare system, and wearing personal protective equipment in hot, humid environments. A lower perceived risk from COVID-19, and increased empathy after recovering from COVID-19 were unique enablers. CONCLUSIONS: This study uncovered barriers and enablers to attending suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases unique to paramedicine, often stemming from the mobile nature of prehospital care, and identifies the need for further research in paramedicine post-pandemic to better understand how paramedics can be supported during public health emergencies to ensure uninterrupted ambulance service delivery.

Policy and weather influences on mobility during the early US COVID-19 pandemic.

As the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to proliferate across the globe, it is a struggle to predict and prevent its spread. The successes of mobility interventions demonstrate how policies can help limit the person-to-person interactions that are essential to infection. With significant community spread, experts predict this virus will continue to be a threat until safe and effective vaccines have been developed and widely deployed. We aim to understand mobility changes during the first major quarantine period in the United States, measured via mobile device tracking, by assessing how people changed their behavior in response to policies and to weather. Here, we show that consistent national messaging was associated with consistent national behavioral change, regardless of local policy. Furthermore, although human behavior did vary with outdoor air temperature, these variations were not associated with variations in a proxy for the rate of encounters between people. The independence of encounters and temperatures suggests that weather-related behavioral changes will, in many cases, be of limited relevance for SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics. Both of these results are encouraging for the potential of clear national messaging to help contain any future pandemics, and possibly to help contain COVID-19.

Race and COVID-19 among Social Workers in Health Settings: Physical, Mental Health, Personal Protective Equipment, and Financial Stressors.

Social work is an essential workforce integral to the United States' public health infrastructure and response to COVID-19. To understand stressors among frontline social workers during COVID-19, a cross-sectional study of U.S-based social workers (N = 1,407) in health settings was collected (in June through August 2020). Differences in outcome domains (health, mental health, personal protective equipment [PPE] access, financial stress) were examined by workers' demographics and setting. Ordinal logistic, multinomial, and linear regressions were conducted. Participants reported moderate or severe physical (57.3 percent) and mental (58.3 percent) health concerns; 39.3 percent expressed PPE access concerns. Social workers of color were more likely to report significantly higher levels of concern across all domains. Those identifying as Black, American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN), Asian American/Pacific Islander (AAPI), multiracial, or Hispanic/Latinx were over 50 percent more likely to experience either moderate or severe physical health concerns, 60 percent more likely to report severe mental health concerns, and over 30 percent more likely to report moderate PPE access concerns. The linear regression model was significantly associated with higher levels of financial stress for social workers of color. COVID-19 has exposed racial and social injustices that that hold true for social workers in health settings. Improved social systems are critical not just for those impacted by COVID-19, but also for the protection and sustainability of the current and future workforce responding to COVID-19.

COVID-19 real-world data for the US and lessons to reopen business.

This Pearl article recounts the story of a US corporation, Lennar, the nation's leading homebuilder, an essential function in the US (not allowed to lock down), when faced with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at the end of February 2020. The culture of the company, which allowed it to proceed safely, is one of cohesion, trust, teamwork, and respect for fellow humans. Theirs is a culture in which the safety, wellness, and health of the associates (employees) and the communities they serve is the number one priority. All associates wear a name badge with first name only, and all name badges share the same family name, Lennar. At Lennar, individual success means nothing, and collective success means everything. This is the story of how Lennar took control of the COVID-19 pandemic, metamorphosed itself into an even stronger organization, better suited to deal with COVID-19, and more importantly, optimally suited for the 21st century. The lessons learned not only were instrumental to Lennar but could also apply to any company eager to reopen their business.

SARS-CoV-2 and Health Care Worker Protection in Low-Risk Settings: a Review of Modes of Transmission and a Novel Airborne Model Involving Inhalable Particles.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been intense debate over SARS-CoV-2's mode of transmission and appropriate personal protective equipment for health care workers in low-risk settings. The objective of this review is to identify and appraise the available evidence (clinical trials and laboratory studies on masks and respirators, epidemiological studies, and air sampling studies), clarify key concepts and necessary conditions for airborne transmission, and shed light on knowledge gaps in the field. We find that, except for aerosol-generating procedures, the overall data in support of airborne transmission-taken in its traditional definition (long-distance and respirable aerosols)-are weak, based predominantly on indirect and experimental rather than clinical or epidemiological evidence. Consequently, we propose a revised and broader definition of "airborne," going beyond the current droplet and aerosol dichotomy and involving short-range inhalable particles, supported by data targeting the nose as the main viral receptor site. This new model better explains clinical observations, especially in the context of close and prolonged contacts between health care workers and patients, and reconciles seemingly contradictory data in the SARS-CoV-2 literature. The model also carries important implications for personal protective equipment and environmental controls, such as ventilation, in health care settings. However, further studies, especially clinical trials, are needed to complete the picture.

A study of Indiana University Health's spirit of inquiry and innovation during COVID.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has required nursing innovations to meet patient care needs not previously encountered. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe nursing innovations conceived, implemented, and desired during the first COVID-19 surge. METHODS: The investigators invited registered nurses employed across 16 Midwest hospitals (6,207) to complete the survey. Respondents provided demographics and written descriptions of innovations they conceived, witnessed, and desired. Investigators analyzed text responses using standard content analytic procedures and summarized quantitative demographics using percentages. FINDINGS: Nurses reported seven types of innovations that would (a) improve personal protective equipment (PPE), (b) limit the need to repeatedly don and doff PPE, (c) ensure safer practice, (d) conserve and access supplies, (e) provide patient and family education and support, (f) make team member communication more efficient, and (g) improve peer support. DISCUSSION: Nurses are in a unique position to generate innovative solutions to meet patient care needs under adverse and rapidly changing situations.

Changes in Stress and Workplace Shortages Reported by U.S. Critical Care Physicians Treating Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Eleven months into the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the country faces accelerating rates of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. Little is known about the experiences of critical care physicians caring for the sickest coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Our goal is to understand how high stress levels and shortages faced by these physicians during Spring 2020 have evolved. DESIGN: We surveyed (October 23, 2020 to November 16, 2020) U.S. critical care physicians treating coronavirus disease 2019 patients who participated in a National survey earlier in the pandemic (April 23, 2020 to May 3, 2020) regarding their stress and shortages they faced. SETTING: ICU. PATIENTS: Coronavirus disease 2019 patients. INTERVENTION: Irrelevant. MEASUREMENT: Physician emotional distress/physical exhaustion: low (not at all/not much), moderate, or high (a lot/extreme). Shortage indicators: insufficient ICU-trained staff and shortages in medication, equipment, or personal protective equipment requiring protocol changes. MAIN RESULTS: Of 2,375 U.S. critical care attending physicians who responded to the initial survey, we received responses from 1,356 (57.1% response rate), 97% of whom (1,278) recently treated coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Two thirds of physicians (67.6% [864]) reported moderate or high levels of emotional distress in the Spring versus 50.7% (763) in the Fall. Reports of staffing shortages persisted with 46.5% of Fall respondents (594) reporting a staff shortage versus 48.3% (617) in the Spring. Meaningful shortages of medication and equipment reported in the Spring were largely alleviated. Although personal protective equipment shortages declined by half, they remained substantial. CONCLUSIONS: Stress, staffing, and, to a lesser degree, personal protective equipment shortages faced by U.S. critical care physicians remain high. Stress levels were higher among women. Considering the persistence of these findings, rising levels of infection nationally raise concerns about the capacity of the U.S. critical care system to meet ongoing and future demands.

Community perspectives on the COVID-19 response, Zimbabwe.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate community and health-care workers' perspectives on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and on early pandemic responses during the first 2 weeks of national lockdown in Zimbabwe. METHODS: Rapid qualitative research was carried out between March and April 2020 via phone interviews with one representative from each of four community-based organizations and 16 health-care workers involved in a trial of community-based services for young people. In addition, information on COVID-19 was collected from social media platforms, news outlets and government announcements. Data were analysed thematically. FINDINGS: Four themes emerged: (i) individuals were overloaded with information but lacked trusted sources, which resulted in widespread fear and unanswered questions; (ii) communities had limited ability to comply with prevention measures, such as social distancing, because access to long-term food supplies and water at home was limited and because income had to be earned daily; (iii) health-care workers perceived themselves to be vulnerable and undervalued because of a shortage of personal protective equipment and inadequate pay; and (iv) other health conditions were sidelined because resources were redirected, with potentially wide-reaching implications. CONCLUSION: It is important that prevention measures against COVID-19 are appropriate for the local context. In Zimbabwe, communities require support with basic needs and access to reliable information to enable them to follow prevention measures. In addition, health-care workers urgently need personal protective equipment and adequate salaries. Essential health-care services and medications for conditions other than COVID-19 must also continue to be provided to help reduce excess mortality and morbidity.

The mental health of health workers in the pandemic.

Increased readiness to discuss sensitive topics will play a key role in alleviating the psychological stress on health workers responding to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Andréia Azevedo Soares reports.

A Statewide Voluntary Movement Addressing the Shortage of Medical Supplies During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of personal protective equipment compromised efficient patient care and provider safety. Volunteers from many different backgrounds worked to meet these demands. Additive manufacturing, laser cutting, and alternative supply chains were used to produce, test, and deliver essential equipment for health care workers and first responders. Distributed equipment included ear guards, face shields, and masks. Contingent designs were created for powered air-purifying respirator hoods, filtered air pumps, intubation shields, and N95 masks.

The Potential for Cloth Masks to Protect Health Care Clinicians From SARS-CoV-2: A Rapid Review.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led at times to a scarcity of personal protective equipment, including medical masks, for health care clinicians, especially in primary care settings. The objective of this review was to summarize current evidence regarding the use of cloth masks to prevent respiratory viral infections, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), among health care clinicians. METHODS: We searched 5 databases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website, and the reference lists of identified articles on April 3, 2020. All identified publications were independently screened by 2 reviewers. Two authors independently extracted data and graded the studies. Randomized control trials (RCTs) were graded using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist, and observational and nonhuman subject studies were graded using 11 domains common across frequently used critical appraisal tools. All discrepancies were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: Our search identified 136 original publications. Nine studies met inclusion criteria. We performed a qualitative synthesis of the data from these studies. Four nonrandomized trials, 3 laboratory studies, 1 single-case experiment, and 1 RCT were identified. The laboratory studies found that cloth materials provided measurable levels of particle filtration but were less efficacious at blocking biologic material than medical masks. The RCT found that cloth masks were associated with significantly more viral infections than medical masks. CONCLUSIONS: The current literature suggests that cloth materials are somewhat efficacious in filtering particulate matter and aerosols but provide a worse fit and inferior protection compared to medical masks in clinical environments. The quality and quantity of literature addressing this question are lacking. Cloth masks lack evidence for adequate protection of health care clinicians against respiratory viral infections.

Challenge of forecasting demand of medical resources and supplies during a pandemic: A comparative evaluation of three surge calculators for COVID-19.

Ever since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic, there has been a public health debate concerning medical resources and supplies including hospital beds, intensive care units (ICU), ventilators and protective personal equipment (PPE). Forecasting COVID-19 dissemination has played a key role in informing healthcare professionals and governments on how to manage overburdened healthcare systems. However, forecasting during the pandemic remained challenging and sometimes highly controversial. Here, we highlight this challenge by performing a comparative evaluation for the estimations obtained from three COVID-19 surge calculators under different social distancing approaches, taking Lebanon as a case study. Despite discrepancies in estimations, the three surge calculators used herein agree that there will be a relative shortage in the capacity of medical resources and a significant surge in PPE demand if the social distancing policy is removed. Our results underscore the importance of implementing containment interventions including social distancing in alleviating the demand for medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the absence of any medication or vaccine. The paper also highlights the value of employing several models in surge planning.

An International survey on living kidney donation and transplant practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The scope of the impact of the Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic on living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) practices across the world is not well-defined. We received survey responses from 204 transplant centers internationally from May to June 2020 regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on LDKT practices. Respondents represented 16 countries on five continents. Overall, 75% of responding centers reported that LDKT surgery was on hold (from 67% of North American centers to 91% of European centers). The majority (59%) of centers reported that new donor evaluations were stopped (from 46% of North American centers to 86% of European centers), with additional 23% of centers reporting important decrease in evaluations. Only 10% of centers reported slight variations on their evaluations. For the centers that continued donor evaluations, 40% performed in-person visits, 68% by video, and 42% by telephone. Center concerns for donor (82%) and recipient (76%) safety were the leading barriers to LDKT during the pandemic, followed by patients concerns (48%), and government restrictions (46%). European centers reported more barriers related to staff limitations while North and Latin American centers were more concerned with testing capacity and insufficient resources including protective equipment. As LDKT resumes, 96% of the programs intend to screen donor and recipient pairs for coronavirus infection, most of them with polymerase chain reaction testing of nasopharyngeal swab samples. The COVID-19 pandemic has had broad impact on all aspects of LDKT practice. Ongoing research and consensus-building are needed to guide safe reopening of LDKT programs.

Anxiety, trauma and well-being in health-care professionals during COVID-19 first wave in Spain: the moderating role of personal protection equipment availability.

BACKGROUND: The effect of COVID-19 on Health-Care Professionals' mental health has received increased attention in the last year's literature. However, previous studies essentially evaluated psychopathological symptoms and not the presence of positive mental health. Therefore, the first objective of the present research is to evaluate health-care professionals' mental illness (i.e., anxiety and traumatic intensity) and positive mental health (i.e., well-being) using the Complete State Model of Health. Our second objective is to study the effect of Personal Protection Equipment availability on professionals' mental health. METHODS: Two-hundred and thirty-two health-care professionals working in Spain in the first line of COVID-19 patient care participated in the study. To measure anxiety, traumatic intensity and well-being participants completed the State Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Davidson Trauma Scale, and the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form. Pearson correlations were used to examine the relationships between all scales. In order to test the two continua model of mental health, we used parallel analysis and exploratory factor analysis. To analyze anxiety, traumatic intensity, and well-being differences between health-care professionals with and without Personal Protection Equipment availability we conducted different ANOVAS. To test our hypothesis regarding the moderating role of Personal Protection Equipment availability in the effect of mental illness on positive mental health, data were subjected to a hierarchical regression analysis. RESULTS: As in previous studies, health-care professionals showed high levels of anxiety and traumatic intensity. They also presented low levels of well-being indicators. According to our hypothesis, results of parallel analysis and exploratory factorial analysis indicated that the measures of mental illness and positive mental health loaded on separate but correlated factors. Finally, Personal Protection Equipment availability moderated the effects of state anxiety and traumatic intensity on professionals' well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Health-care professionals' mental illness and positive mental health reflect distinct continua, rather than the extreme ends of a single spectrum. Therefore, it is essential to measure both psychopathology and the presence of positive health to comprehensively evaluate professionals' mental health. Finally, our results indicated that Personal Protection Equipment availability is essential not only for professionals' physical health, but also for their mental health.